DolfanKing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Maybe he realizes he has a chance to compete for
> the starting job...
>
> Don't be surprised if Moore is the starter on day
> 1.

lol

I think if Tanny has a fast WR he'll be able to use that arm strength accordingly. Either way, Moore is some good insurance in case that you've been right all along about RT being a bum.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChyrenB Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > THE Truth Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > > I'd consider Patterson a deep threat.
> > >
> > > Haven't seen anything from Allen that puts
> him
> > in
> > > that category though. Maybe he goes sub
> 4.40
> > at
> > > his pro day but until then he's not in the
> same
> > > category as Patterson.
> >
> > RESPONSE: I guess everyone is allowed a
> "change
> > of mind."
> >
> > Re: Draft predictions
> > Posted by: THE Truth ()
> > Date: October 27, 2012 09:34PM
> >
> >
> > WR: Keenan Allen is my pick at WR in college
> > football. Hunter might go ahead of him
> depending
> > on the team but Allen would be an AWESOME fit
> fit
> > our offense.
> >
> > DE: The kid Clowney from SC is the best DE in
> > college football but he's a frosh so he won't
> be
> > in the draft. After him I really like Bjern
> Warner
> > from Florida State.
> >
> > TE: Tyler Eifert (ND) and Jospeh Fauria (UCLA).
> > Either one would be a huge addition to our
> > offense.
> >
> > LB: Love Jarvis Jones From UGA at OLB and Manti
> > Te'o (ND) at MLB. Both are studs. I think I'd
> like
> > Te'o more at this point but they are both top
> 10
> > picks.
> >
> > RB: I wouldn't waste a high pick on a RB. Too
> many
> > good ones that fall to the 3rd-6th rounds every
> > year.
> >
> > QB: Barkley will be the first QB off the board.
> > Could be Geno Smith but I think Barkely gets
> the
> > nod.
> >
> > As for our first round pick....I'd take Manti
> Te'o
> > if he's on the board over any of the guys I
> > mentioned. But I don't see him getting out of
> the
> > top ten and I don't think we get a shot at him.
> >
> > I have a funny feeling we end up drafting an OT
> in
> > the first round after Long leaves in free
> agency.
>
>
> that's impressive Truth, you nailed the top NFL
> prospects way back in Oct

Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn now and again...


Funny how you make that comment and the other poster you quoted was focused on how I've "changed my mind" on Keenan Allen...as if that weren't allowed... lol

For his edification...that was in October. If you factor in the rest of their seasons and what they've done post season then yes...Allen isn't the top guy anymore. I still think he's a good fit for our offense but he's not the deep threat Patterson is until he proves he has elite speed...which he doesn't.

The thing about drafting Allen at #12, and why its a bad idea, is that there are a dozen WR's in this draft that would be a good fit in our offense and Allen came back to the pack this year as they improved.


The only WR I'd take at #12 at this point is Tavon Austin and that's a huge risk because of his size.

Still, if I had him in the slot with Mike Wallace outside and a TE that can run a little...Austin would be SCARY.

808phan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> DolfanKing Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Maybe he realizes he has a chance to compete
> for
> > the starting job...
> >
> > Don't be surprised if Moore is the starter on
> day
> > 1.
>
> lol
>
> I think if Tanny has a fast WR he'll be able to
> use that arm strength accordingly. Either way,
> Moore is some good insurance in case that you've
> been right all along about RT being a bum.


lolol...is that what he said??

Hasn't posted in weeks and you get that gem...well a troll's gotta troll...

Dolphanking might be MIA1..................using a internet dictionary.

samsam3738 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesti Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > No need to insult one to build up the other.
> Moore
> > is not a scrub.
>
>
> I dont know what else to say about a qb who was in
> the league for 6 or 7 years and gets benched for a
> rookie qb who was a wide receiver in college and
> played QB for 3 snaps.
>
> And i will add if moore starts we are in serious
> trouble. Time to draft another qb next year if
> this happens.
>
> But im positive it will not happen. And now there
> is even a lesser chance that the real deal will
> have some serious weapons to throw to.


Only one of the QB's beat the Jets last year.... It wasnt the Rookie.....

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> samsam3738 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > eesti Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > No need to insult one to build up the other.
> > Moore
> > > is not a scrub.
> >
> >
> > I dont know what else to say about a qb who was
> in
> > the league for 6 or 7 years and gets benched for
> a
> > rookie qb who was a wide receiver in college
> and
> > played QB for 3 snaps.
> >
> > And i will add if moore starts we are in
> serious
> > trouble. Time to draft another qb next year if
> > this happens.
> >
> > But im positive it will not happen. And now
> there
> > is even a lesser chance that the real deal will
> > have some serious weapons to throw to.
>
>
> Only one of the QB's beat the Jets last year....
> It wasnt the Rookie.....


Actually doesn't the rookie get the "W" since he started?

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Crowder52 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > samsam3738 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > eesti Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > No need to insult one to build up the
> other.
> > > Moore
> > > > is not a scrub.
> > >
> > >
> > > I dont know what else to say about a qb who
> was
> > in
> > > the league for 6 or 7 years and gets benched
> for
> > a
> > > rookie qb who was a wide receiver in college
> > and
> > > played QB for 3 snaps.
> > >
> > > And i will add if moore starts we are in
> > serious
> > > trouble. Time to draft another qb next year
> if
> > > this happens.
> > >
> > > But im positive it will not happen. And now
> > there
> > > is even a lesser chance that the real deal
> will
> > > have some serious weapons to throw to.
> >
> >
> > Only one of the QB's beat the Jets last
> year....
> > It wasnt the Rookie.....
>
>
> Actually doesn't the rookie get the "W" since he
> started?


LOL the only reason moore played that game was because the real deal was hurt. Or else he doesnt see the field the entire year.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> eesti Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yeah we should probably just go ahead and trade
> > Tannehill to New England or New York.
>
>
> Is that directed at Chryen or King?

RESPONSE: Definition...Ignorance= Lack of knowledge, not to be confused with stupidity.

However, if you are ignorant, you can APPEAR TO BE stupid.

THE Truth has blocked me.

Had he not, he would have known that since the beginning of the season, I have been one of Tannehill's STRONGEST SUPPORTERS.

But because he has blocked me, HIS KNOWLEDGE IS AS OLD AS LAST APRIL.

Therefore, his lack of knowledge translates into IGNORANCE which in this case, means his statement probably strikes most posters on this board as odd at best, stupid most likely.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> > ChyrenB Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > THE Truth Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > >
> > > > I'd consider Patterson a deep threat.
> > > >
> > > > Haven't seen anything from Allen that puts
> > him
> > > in
> > > > that category though. Maybe he goes sub
> > 4.40
> > > at
> > > > his pro day but until then he's not in the
> > same
> > > > category as Patterson.
> > >
> > > RESPONSE: I guess everyone is allowed a
> > "change
> > > of mind."
> > >
> > > Re: Draft predictions
> > > Posted by: THE Truth ()
> > > Date: October 27, 2012 09:34PM
> > >
> > >
> > > WR: Keenan Allen is my pick at WR in college
> > > football. Hunter might go ahead of him
> > depending
> > > on the team but Allen would be an AWESOME fit
> > fit
> > > our offense.
>
> Funny how you make that comment and the other
> poster you quoted was focused on how I've "changed
> my mind" on Keenan Allen...as if that weren't
> allowed... lol
>
> For his edification...that was in October.

RESPONSE: That's why it is fair to call you out on it.

Let's take the example of me and Ryan Tannehill.

PRIOR TO THE DRAFT, I said that Tannehill was NOT WORTH THE EIGHTH PICK IN THE DRAFT.

However SINCE HE HAS PLAYED, and based on his PLAYING IN THE PROS, I have changed my mind.

That's allowed. Changing based on how a rookie plays that it. Many thought Dan Marino was not even worth being our choice as the 6th QB chose in the first round.

However, it is odd indeed that A PERSON CHANGES HIS MIND ABOUT A ROOKIE EVEN PRIOR TO SEEING HIM PLAY IN THE PROS.

That's a little more difficult to understand.

I mean first he "MY CHOICE FOR NO. 12" and then you are wondering "where does this talk of Keenan Allen come from?"

I think the only difference is that you have changed your mind and I haven't and now, as usual, you jump on a chance to disagree with me.

come on Chyren, a lot can change about people's views of where players should be drafted in Oct vs March, without them having played a pro game. Hell Barkley was supposed to be in play for us at #8 last year had he come out, now he's lucky to go in the first round.

no one had even really heard of C Patterson till the season ended and he lit up the combine, now people are saying he could go in the top 10.

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually doesn't the rookie get the "W" since he
> started?


What is this baseball and Moore gets the save? lol

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> THE Truth Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Actually doesn't the rookie get the "W" since
> he
> > started?
>
>
> What is this baseball and Moore gets the save? lol


As good as matt more is .....he got the save but under these circunstances.......

Comes out in the 9th inning winning by 1......

1...he gives out 3 straight bases on balls.

2..no outs

3. then three line drives out to SS..3 ROPES........The SS jumps like 10 foot in the air....and makes 3 spectacular catches...

samsam3738 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> As good as matt more is .....he got the save but
> under these circunstances.......
>
> Comes out in the 9th inning winning by 1......
>
> 1...he gives out 3 straight bases on balls.
>
> 2..no outs
>
> 3. then three line drives out to SS..3
> ROPES........The SS jumps like 10 foot in the
> air....and makes 3 spectacular catches...


What are you talking about buddy? Tannehill went 2 for 5 for 18 yards no points in that game... We won the game by 21 points... 30-9...
THe game we lost was the OT thriller we lost 20-23, RT played the whole game...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Not that it matters all that much because the
> system is clearly flawed, but we were up 3-0 when
> Tannehill got hurt...so Moore really only came in
> and preserved the lead.

Yep I remember now, Reggie Bush was on fire during that first drive. Isnt that when he stiff armed Cromartie pretty good on one of those first runs...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> come on Chyren, a lot can change about people's
> views of where players should be drafted in Oct vs
> March, without them having played a pro game. Hell
> Barkley was supposed to be in play for us at #8
> last year had he come out, now he's lucky to go in
> the first round.
>
> no one had even really heard of C Patterson till
> the season ended and he lit up the combine, now
> people are saying he could go in the top 10.

berk, if all he had said was "I'd take Patterson Now" then I would not have said anything.

But he trashed Keenan Allen which he once said would have been his top pick.


and that's a horse of a different color.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> berk, if all he had said was "I'd take Patterson
> Now" then I would not have said anything.
>
> But he trashed Keenan Allen which he once said
> would have been his top pick.
>
>
> and that's a horse of a different color.

I agree, I think it is fine to point out members who's current position contradicts previous positions and asking them to explain... Nothing wrong with accountability on what we say around here.... We all change our position on players from time to time...Truth might have a great reason why he changed his position, I would love to hear why he did, that is interesing to me..If he says he did it just to piss of Chyren, I might spill my cheerios...lol

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Crowder52 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChyrenB Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > berk, if all he had said was "I'd take
> Patterson
> > Now" then I would not have said anything.
> >
> > But he trashed Keenan Allen which he once said
> > would have been his top pick.
> >
> >
> > and that's a horse of a different color.


>
> I agree, I think it is fine to point out members
> who's current position contradicts previous
> positions and asking them to explain... Nothing
> wrong with accountability on what we say around
> here.... We all change our position on players
> from time to time...Truth might have a great
> reason why he changed his position, I would love
> to hear why he did, that is interesing to me..If
> he says he did it just to piss of Chyren, I might
> spill my cheerios...lol

I've said repeatedly that I wouldn't take Patterson or Allen at #12.

I did say in one thread a month or two back where the author posed a question of a handful of guys being available that under those circumstances I'd take Allen but I'd prefer an O-lineman or Pass rusher.

I think I've been pretty consistent in that stance so far.


This conversation started out with my merely pointing out that Allen wasn't "an instant long ball threat". That he's not a burner on tape, didn't play like a burner in college and Patterson is the only one of the two who fits that description since he ran under 4.37 at the combine.

Somehow your buddy Bob morphed that into a conversation in his head where I apparently "trashed" Allen. I challenge anyone to show me where (other than in Bob's deluded mind) I trashed Allen.

All I've said about him is that he's not a "long ball" guy on tape and should be perceived as such until he runs a fast 40 time that equates to a deep threat like Patterson has. That was countered with a comment from OCTOBER where I said that I thought he was the best WR prospect in college and that he was a terrific fit for our system. I clarified that comment for Bob since it really had nothing to do with whether Allen is an "instant long ball" threat or not.

I clarified by saying that I still think he's a very good fit for our system but he's come back to the pack this year while others have jumped their game up.

Something that is clearly true and not an attempt to "trash" the guy.

I went on to add that I like Keenan Allen. And still felt he'd be a good player for us but there are a dozen WR's in this draft that could be a good player for us.

Patterson is one of those guys. As I said before, I wouldn't take Patterson at #12 but I'd be excited to have him cause his physical tools are scary good.


The only WR I'd take at #12 is Tavon Austin, and I'd only do that if I was able to trade Devonne Bess. I only need one guy who is locked into the slot.

I hope that clears things up for you Crowder.

I doubt it will clear anything up for your compadre.

Truth- you are both my compadres..... thanks for taking the time to explain your position... seems logical to me. ANd yes you have been very consistant in your position of pass rusher or Olineman, I can vouche for that... I like Allen for his size and route running ability. I like patterson for his ceiling and raw skills. Austin seems like a luxury to me, but is defintely a baller... And I think our greatest need is a true wideout, not a small quick slot guy... Although as you said I would be happy with any of them in Aqua and Orange...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

And I based my opinion that Allen was a long ball threat based on seeing him play at Cal, not on some combines, etc.

And Patterson ran a 4.42 40.

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And Patterson ran a 4.42 40.


That's the combine "official".

But that's BS.

The simulcast Tavon Austin on top of Marquise Goodwin and Goodwin won by a foot at most.

His official was 4.27 and Austin's was 4.34.

Their offical's aren't accurate.

Besides, Allen didn't run at the combine so there's no comparison.


We'll see what they run at their pro days.

Assuming the simulcast is accurate and in true time....

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Assuming the simulcast is accurate and in true
> time....


Yes, and assuming that we all actually exist and aren't the dream sequence of another entity in an entirely different plane of existence.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Actually doesn't the rookie get the "W" since he
> started?


yes, but only if he pitched five innings!